Restriction of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A applies only to fraudulently or ineligible availed credit; mere wrongful recipient availment is insuffi...
Business reorganisation requires recognition of successor's modified return; draft orders against dissolved transferor quashed and fresh review direct...
Pre-commencement R&D deduction denied where business had not commenced; deeming benefit requires tangible start of manufacture or commercial exploitat...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5641 to 5660 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Issue: Whether penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E were barred by limitation. The tribunal held that, applying sections 271D, 271E and 275(1) and following the Supreme Court precedent in Hissaria Brothers, the Assessing Officer's penalty orders were time-barred because they were not issued within the statutory limitation period; the appellate orders setting aside those penalties for being beyond limitation were lawful. Consequence: all four impugned penalty orders were quashed. - ITAT
Issue: Whether penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E were barred by limitation. The tribunal held that, applying sections 271D, 271E and 275(1) and following the Supreme Court precedent in Hissaria Brothers, the Assessing Officer's penalty orders were time-barred because they were not issued within the statutory limitation period; the appellate orders setting aside those penalties for being beyond limitation were lawful. Consequence: all four impugned penalty orders were quashed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
